toward another, by visiting and comforting and relieving one the other. Be watching in prayer; especially remember those of our brethren who are especially endangered ***. I fear me our carelessness was over great unto our God for the lives of those two so notable lights of his Church, who now rest with him; and that thus he took them away, for many respects, seeming good to his wisdom; so also, that we might learn to be more careful in prayer in all such causes. Pray, then, brethren, for brother Mr. Francis Johnson and for me, that God may spare us unto his Church, if it be his good pleasure; or give us exceeding faithfulness; and be every way comfortable unto the sister and wife of the dead: I mean unto my beloved Mrs. Barrowe, and Mrs. Greenwood, whom I heartily salute, and desire to be much comforted in their God, who, by his blessings from above, will countervail unto them the want of so notable a brother and a husband. I would wish you earnestly to write, yea, to send if you may, to comfort the brethren in the West and North, that they faint not in these troubles; and that you also may have of their advice and they of yours, what to do in these desolate times. I would wish you and them to be together if you may, whithersoever you shall be banished; and to this purpose bethink you beforehand, where to be, and be all of you assured, that he who is your God in England, will be your God in any land under the whole heaven; for the earth and the fullness thereof are his; and blessed are they that for his cause are bereaved of any part of the same. Finally, my brethren, the Eternal God bless you and yours, that I may meet you all unto my comfort in the blessed kingdom of heaven. Thus having from my heart, and with tears, performed, it may be, my last duty towards you in this life, I salute you all in the Lord, both men and women, even those whom I have not mentioned, for all your names I know not. And remember to stand fast in Jesus Christ, as you have received him unto immortality; and may he confirm and establish you unto the end for the praise of his glory. Amen. Your loving, brother in the patience and sufferings of the Gospel. "JOHN PENRY.

"24th 4th mo., April, 1503."

This was the last work of Penry; to give a word of encouragement and comfort to his brethren who were now about to be driven into that exile from which our pilgrim fathers came, to give us, their children, our pleasant homes in this western world. Others have labored, and we have entered into their labors. How does it become the descendants of such ancestors never to throw away the principles which they prized so dear,

IX.

"THE JUDICIOUS HOOKER."

The design and principles of his Ecclesiastical Polity. Its controlling influence over the dynasty of the Stuarts. These principles examined. His doctrine. His notion of the power of orders.

THE disputes which began, about vestments and ceremonies involved deep principles concerning the rights of conscience. The reign of Elizabeth had not expired before the debate left the form of questions concerning particular grievances, and assumed a shape corresponding with the reality-not a question about surplices, caps, and ceremonies, but a deep and solemn inquiry into the ground, nature, and limits of ecclesiastical power; and the rights of conscience in congregations of Christians, and in individual men.

Accordingly, when Richard Hooker, in the latter part of Elizabeth's reign, took up his pen against the Puritans in justification of the severities practised by the queen, the bishops, and the High Commission, he spent not his strength upon the particular impositions of kneeling at the sacrament, the surplice, the sign of the cross in baptism, and things of that sort, but laid down the broad PRINCIPLE that the CHURCH has authority to impose such things according to her discretion; and that the conscience of individuals and of particular congregations in such matters is not to be regarded; but that they may be rightly and piously COMPELLED to yield, by whatever PENALTIES good mother Church and the sovereign prince may find it necessary to employ for the attainment of that end.

Richard Hooker was sufficiently "judicious" to perceive that on no principle short of this, could the rigors of the established Church be justified, or the CHURCH itself, as established in England, be vindicated, and that if this principle could be substantiated, the robes, ceremonies and liturgies were all right; and the fines, the imprisonments, the banishments, and the slaughters inflicted, were all proper, just, and wholesome punishments for the coercion of the wickedly rebellious.

Accordingly, the account which Hooker himself gives of his great work on Ecclesiastical Polity, is, that his design was " To write

a deliberate and sober Treatise on the CHURCH'S POWER, to make canons for the use of ceremonies, and BY LAW TO IMPOSE AN OBEDIENCE to them, as upon her children, and this he proposed to do in eight books of the LAWS OF ECCLESIASTICAL POLITY."*

This was cutting up the whole matter by the roots. Grant this principle and there is no further dispute about surplices, liturgies, and ceremonies; the Church may stand upon her authority. There are no rights of conscience in the case; and if any begin to prate about conscience, or hesitate to yield a due conformity, they may be righteously silenced, imprisoned, banished, hanged, or burnt. A most convenient doctrine, no doubt, for the prelates and the despotic queen, in her capacity of head of the Church!

This was the great design and principle of Hooker, which he maintained with consummate ability, in a work on which he employed his undivided energies for a series of years. Many of his subordinate principles, illustrations, and arguments, are admirable; and could they be separated from this great design, they would be most excellent. Much truth is mingled with his scheme (when was any monstrous error ever put forth, entirely dissociated from all truth, and in its own naked deformity ?), but that has only served to make the lurking mischief the more deceptive and dangerous.

This great doctrine of Hooker, and the ability with which he maintained it, have made him the great champion of the Church of England, from that day to this. He became, in his day, the beloved of Archbishop Whitgift; the honored of Queen Elizabeth; and when King James came from Scotland to take possession of the English throne, almost the first thing he did, was to inquire of the Archbishop for "his friend Mr. Hooker, that writ the works of Ecclesiastical Polity," and he expressed great sorrow, when he learned that Hooker died the year before. King James, when among the Presbyterians in Scotland, had often and earnestly professed himself, from entire conviction, a Presbyterian. His accession to the throne of England wrought a marvellous change in his opinions. "No Bishop, no King," became now his favorite saying; and he affirmed that " Presbytery agreed with monarchy, as well as God with devil." The work of Hooker was precisely to his mind. It maintained his lofty notions of Church prerogative; or rather of his own prerogative as head of the Church. It was indeed as thoroughgoing a defence of despotism as could be desired. It is no wonder that King James (as Hooker's biographer says) did never mention him but with the epithet of "The learned,” or “Ju

*Life, p. 58, vol. i., Ed. Lond., 1825.

DICIOUS," or "Reverend," or "Venerable Mr. Hooker." "Nor did his son, our late King Charles I., ever mention him, but with the same reverence; enjoining his son our own gracious king [Charles II.] to be studious in Mr. Hooker's book." The Bishop of Exeter, in his epistle dedicatory of an edition of Hooker, addressed to King Charles II., says, that the king "needs nothing more to commend the work to his majesty's acceptance, than the commendation it had from his royal father; who, a few days before he was crowned with martyrdom, recommended to his dearest children, the study of Mr. Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, even next to the Bible."

It was here that these infatuated scions of an infatuated family drank in those lessons of despotism, and that contempt for the rights of conscience, which, under James I., drove away our Pilgrim Fathers; brought his son Charles I. to the block; led on Charles II. in his iniquitous attempt to force Episcopacy upon the Presbyterians of Scotland; and which lost James II. and his heirs the kingdom.

That these four successive kings of the house of Stuart might have been so infatuated as to intrench so presumptuously upon the liberties of their people, even if Hooker had never written,is possible. But it is more probable that the principles and reasonings of Hooker ripened the principles of despotism in these kings; gave conscience and boldness to their endeavors; and were thus the remoter but actual causes of the calamities that overwhelmed the dynasty of the Stuarts. I see little cause to doubt, that if the judicious Hooker had never lived, America would not have been settled by the Pilgrims; Charles I. would not have been beheaded; Scotland would have been saved the burnings and butcheries of the Episcopal war; and James II. would not have been driven from his throne.

It seems proper, therefore, in our survey of the history of those times, to pay some particular attention to a work, otherwise so famous, and which was productive of so great results both in the religious and the political world.

The design of Hooker, then, was, as has been stated, "To write a deliberate and sober treatise on the Church's power; to make Canons for the use of Ceremonies; and by law to impose an obedience to them as upon her children."

The "Canons for the use of ceremonies," which Hooker maintained the Church's power to make and impose by law, were the imposition of a Liturgy, vestments, and the cross in baptism, kneeling at the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, and all other forms and rituals which the Church had, from time to time, devised and ordained.

He rejects entirely the idea that the Scripture is the sole or